Indian rights, religious freedom, equality claims and strict criminal penalties have gotten into a tangled mat [Marcia Zug, Prawfsblawg] Earlier on eagle feather law here, here, and here.
{ 4 comments }
Chronicling the high cost of our legal system
Posts tagged as:
Indian rights, religious freedom, equality claims and strict criminal penalties have gotten into a tangled mat [Marcia Zug, Prawfsblawg] Earlier on eagle feather law here, here, and here.
{ 4 comments }
Missed from earlier this year: in the fall of 2007, following extensive litigation, the government of Canada began issuing payments to persons of Indian ancestry who had attended an officially promoted network of residential schools where abuse was common and whose aim of assimilating students into broader Canadian life was later assailed as calculated to suppress native culture. While the payments brought benefit to many recipients, among others they seem to have led to new cycles of dysfunction, family strife and substance abuse. [Jack Branswell and Ken Meaney, "Native suicides linked to compensation", Canwest/National Post, Jan. 26 via Western Standard]
{ 2 comments }
This Saturday at the Reagan Library in Simi Valley, California, near L.A., the Federalist Society will be holding its all-day third annual Western Conference. This time the theme is the law of American Indians and Indian tribes, a topic of immense intellectual interest and also of much practical importance to non-Indians through much of the rural West, in localities nationwide where casino development rouses controversy, and even, as I have pointed out in a couple of articles, to complete bystanders in the East who have found their land title suddenly thrown into doubt by the revival of antiquated tribal land claims. I’m going to be a participant on one of the panels, which will feature a distinguished assemblage of law professors and others; another reason for my interest in the topic is that a chapter on Indian law figures in my book in progress on the influence of law schools on American law. More details here.
{ 1 comment }
The legal humor site has nominated its favorite stories of 2008. Among them:
{ 1 comment }
{ 4 comments }
* New Jersey: “A federal judge in Camden last week dismissed a lawsuit filed by a band of American Indians seeking to reclaim land they said the state sold out from under them more than 200 years ago. The Unalachtigo band of the Nanticoke-Lenni Lenape Nation demanded the return of 3,044 acres of the former Brotherton Reservation, which sits mostly in Shamong Township in Burlington County.” [Philadelphia Inquirer; Camden Courier-Post/Red Lake Net News, 2006 (expensive law firm of Reed Smith was representing tribal band, which was angling for casino rights)].
* A new C$550 billion land claim launched by the Whitefish Lake tribe (or “First Nation”, to adopt progressive Canadian terminology) includes the entire city of Sudbury, Ontario [Timmins Press, Sudbury Star]
* Second Circuit panel due this week to hear appeal on upstate New York Oneida claim, in which ejectment of current landowners is apparently (for the moment) off table as option [Rome [N.Y.] Sentinel; earlier on Indian land claim litigation].
{ 4 comments }
Why does the idea of cultural property have so many advocates? “It seems to establish a bulwark against the plunder of antiquities.” And yet how quickly it’s turned into a way of looting premodern artifacts from Western owners whose claim of title is stronger than that of foreign governments or indigenous/Indian tribes. “But if cultural property really did exist, the Enlightenment museum would be an example of it: an institution that evolved, almost uniquely, out of Western civilization. And the cultural property movement could be seen as a persistent attempt to undermine it. And take illicit possession.” (Edward Rothstein, “Antiquities, the World Is Your Homeland”, New York Times, May 27).
{ 2 comments }
{ 16 comments }
Two groups claiming to be American Indian tribes are offering membership for $50. The AP report (via Hit & Run) suggests that the memberships are being sold for purposes of evading immigration laws, but no one explores the affirmative action possibilities, though Dr. Seuss anticipated such a scheme in 1961. Alas, the two groups are not federally recognized Indian tribes, so the deal is just a scam.
{ 2 comments }
In two separate cases, federal judges have rejected high-profile but long-shot claims by Indian tribes asserting ownership of land tracts in the Northeast. U.S. District Court Judge Thomas C. Platt said the Shinnecock tribe of Long Island, New York (see Jun. 13, Jun. 19 and Jun. 27, 2005), had forfeited its potential claim on 3,600 acres of high-value land in the Hamptons by waiting more than 140 years to assert possession. (John Moreno Gonzales, “Ruling aside, tribe plans to build casino”, Newsday, Dec. 5; “Judge cites passage of time in Shinnecock land claim”, Indianz.com, Dec. 6; ruling in PDF format courtesy Indianz.com). And in New Haven, U.S. District Court Judge Janet Bond Arterton brought homeowners’ ordeal nearer an end Nov. 29 by ruling against the federally unrecognized group that calls itself the Golden Hill Paugussetts, which has been asserting land claims in various Connecticut towns for 14 years. (Gale Courey Toensing, “Golden Hill Paugussetts will appeal rejected land claims”, Indian Country Today, Dec. 11).
Under California law, if you’re digging on your property and you find prehistoric remains, you must contact the state’s Native American Heritage Commission.
The commission then assigns a person known as the “most-likely descendant” to consult with the landowner. But there’s sometimes tenuous or no ancestral ties between the “descendant” and the uncovered bodies, scientists and American Indians said. … Praetzellis and other researchers said it is more important for American Indians to be involved in the moving of ancient remains than to force them to prove a genetic link after being left out entirely for decades.“They just have to say, ‘Yeah, I feel culturally connected to those remains,’” said Jeff Fentress, a San Francisco State anthropologist. “It is really up to that person to determine how to handle that burial.”
Landowners often pay consulting fees to persons on the designated “descendant” lists, and some persons of American Indian descent say they would like to be on the lists but were left off because of politics. Some Indian activists are also upset that the state law does not give the “descendant” the right to block development. (Matt Krupnick, “Ancient remains causing problems”, Contra Costa Times, Oct. 18). Earlier: Jul. 16, 2005, etc.
{ 2 comments }
Think twice about trying to grow your own from nursery stock: If the patent held by biotech firm Syngenta doesn’t get you, the indigenous-flora royalty supposedly owed to the government of Tanzania just might (Antony Barnett, “The new piracy: how West ’steals’ Africa’s plants”, The Observer (UK), Aug. 27).
{ 1 comment }
The only thing worse than a frivolous lawsuit is a frivolous repeat of a frivolous lawsuit:
A group of Native Americans filed a new legal challenge yesterday to trademarks for the name and logo of the Washington Redskins, saying the team’s name is a racial slur that should be changed.A petition filed at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office by six Native Americans represents a second chance for Indians to challenge the football franchise’s name. The team prevailed in an earlier fight when a U.S. District Court judge ruled that the plaintiffs waited too long under trademark law to object. This time, the complaint was filed with a new set of plaintiffs.
…
“The term ‘redskin’ was and is a pejorative, derogatory, denigrating, offensive, scandalous, contemptuous, disreputable, disparaging and racist designation for a Native American person,” the complaint says.
Whatever thesaurus the plaintiffs are using, I want one. I’m surprised the complaint didn’t add “just plain icky.”
{ 5 comments }
“Lawyers who have been representing survivors of Canada’s residential school system are expected to get the biggest payment ever recorded for a Canadian class action case.” The federal government will pay about C$80 million in fees, of which half will go to the Regina-based Merchant Law Group and half to a consortium of other lawyers. (”Lawyers set to be paid $80M in school abuse deal”, CTV, May 8; “School abuse deal includes $80M for lawyers”, CBC, May 8). The fees are part of a $2 billion deal intended to resolve portions of the litigation over the federally-sponsored, church-run Indian schools, which were originally accused of permitting the infliction of physical and sexual abuse on some of their students; later the litigation expanded to include charges of “cultural deprivation” and alienation on behalf of thousands of Native Americans who attended the schools, which were geared toward assimilation into Canadian culture (FAQ from CBC on settlement). More: Aug. 23-24, 2000.
{ 1 comment }
As regular readers of this space know (Apr. 14, etc.), I’ve long taken an interest in the injustices that have been visited on innocent landowners in New York, Connecticut and many other states by lawsuits seeking to revive long-defunct Indian land claims. I’ve got a guest column in the latest Forbes (”On My Mind”, May 8, reg) briefly summing up a few of the things wrong with this litigation. A sample:
Until lately Anglo-American law sought a careful balance between the goal of restoring wrongfully taken property to its rightful owners, on the one hand, and the equally valid goal of securing everyone’s property against the danger that a claimant will show up some day to assert a speculative defect in title. Hence doctrines aimed at preventing old disputes from staying alive indefinitely: statutes of limitation, adverse possession, “acquiescence” in unchallenged political boundaries.
In a series of rulings over the past 30 years, however, the U.S. Supreme Court has decided that Indians are wholly different from other land claimants. Law professors have cheered: What cause is more romantic than that of dispossessed Indians? (Somehow owners of small farms in upstate New York never seem to merit the underdog label.) The rulings also constitute a stunning victory for a scrappy cadre of Legal Services lawyers; a few of these antiestablishment types have found themselves, over the arc of a career, gradually transmuted through their tribal connections into highly paid casino promoters, in a transformation worthy of a Balzac or Stendhal novel.
(cross-posted at Point of Law)